I read The Road to Serfdom in 2002 and haven't read it since so I may be
getting the details wrong. I recall that one of the arguments Hayek makes
is that in a planned economy, you will eventually end up with a situation
in which there is a single planner, thus leading to despotism. I think his
argument is that one can't change a part of a plan without changing the
other parts, and thus there must be a single comprehensive plan.

This argument seems pretty flawed to me. At best, it shows that the
different parts of the plan can't be developed independently of each
other. Why can't a group of people develop a coherent plan in concert? And
why would it result in despotism even if there was one planner?


These are just my intuitions and I probably dont remember the argument
perfectly. Does anyone know of any more thorough critiques which have been
published?

Reply via email to